LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO

[Pages:9]LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO

FACULTY COUNCIL

To: From: Subject:

Members of the Corporate Faculty Dr. Nicholas A. Lash, Secretary, Faculty Council Meeting held in the Faculty Dining Room, Stritch School of Medicine, Maywood Campus

I. Meeting called to order by Dr. Kim Dell'Angela, Chair at 3:15 PM.

Dr. Prudence Moylan, History, offered a reflection that included a background of Celtic music.

II. Approval of the minutes of the February 11, Faculty Council minutes

Motion:

Moved: Seconded: Action:

that the minutes of the February 11, 2004 Faculty Council Meeting be approved. Dr. Anthony Cardoza, History Dr. Barbara Velsor-Fredrich, Nursing The motion passed.

III. Chair/Executive Committee Report

Dr. Dell'Angela, Pediatrics, reported on the Executive Committee's February 25th meeting with the Provost, Dr. Pete Facione.

Academic Calendar: One of the items of discussion was the fact that many faculty complained about having inadequate input into the changes in the academic calendar. Yet, Dr. Facione responded by pointing out that he had mentioned calendar changes during the retreat held on August 22nd. A Council member mentioned, however, that faculty were given little detail about the calendar changes.

Questions arose regarding summer school. It appeared to some that course listings were down and that faculty were not eager to teach in the new summer schedule. This summer, most courses will be for 4 weeks, but science courses, which will run for 6 weeks. Dr. Dell'Angela will raise the issue of the success of the new summer schedule in her next meeting with the Provost.

Many faculty have complained that this year's Christmas break was too short. It is reported that next year, there will be two additional days of Christmas break.

Search Committees: The Provost explained to Dr. Dell'Angela that a distinction is made between searches for deans and searches for other administrators. When searching for other administrators, Fr. Garanzini reportedly prefers to first employ prospective administrators as consultants to see how they work out. A Council member questioned whether deans were faculty or administrators. It was suggested that deans were both. That is, typically they were tenured faculty but they did serve as full-time administrators.

It was suggested that the search process for deans had to be improved so that it was more consistent and more transparent to faculty.

Dr. Dell'Angela also reported that administration acknowledged that it had made an error in announcing the results of the search for the Dean of CAS. The recent announcement erroneously implied that the Search Committee had a far greater role in choosing the dean than was indeed the case. Apparently, the Public Relations Department made this inaccurate announcement.

Other Issues: Dr. Judith Wittner, Sociology / Anthropology, reported that a faculty member complained to her that many faculty felt uninformed about what was happening at Loyola. While they were aware that the minutes of Council meetings were on the web, they often felt too busy to download and read them. Dr. Wittner brought up the possibility of biweekly newsletters. It appears that some FC members attempt to regularly inform their constituents the results of FC meetings, while others do not.

Dr. Nicholas Lash, Business, inquired as to when the dean of the School of Business would be evaluated. He was supposed to be evaluated this year, but it appears this will not be the case. Reportedly, the Provost requested that a University Policy Committee modify the dean evaluation process but that the modifications have not yet been completed.

IV. Committee Reports

Research - Dr. Anthony Castro, Chair Dr. Anthony Castro, Basic Sciences, gave a report on the Research Committee. There were two basic issues.

Research Space and Resource: Dr. Castro distributed two memos: one from the Council Research Committee and the other from the Research University Policy Committee. The Council's Research Committee, dated October 03, requested that the Research UPC develop policy pertaining to the allocation of space and other resources to faculty members for research.

In response, the Research UPC sent a memo, dated February 04, to the Research Committee. Several important suggestions and recommendations were included in this response. The most important overall recommendation by the Research UPC was that the various deans working with programs and departments should develop policies on research space allocation.

2

It was suggested by members of the Research Committee that perhaps the Research UPC and / or the individual programs and departments should be more proactive in developing policy. It was suggested that the size of the grant would play a role in the amount of space and resources allocated to faculty. Dr. Castro nonetheless suggested that all faculty, regardless of grant size, should be allocated some minimum amount of space and resources. Dr. Castro invited FC members to send him their comments and suggestions. Pending further input from the FC and members of the Research Committee of FC, Dr. Castro will convey comments back to the Research UPC.

OURS Statement on the Web Page: The second issue dealt with the OURS New Grant statement on the web page dealing with university research support. The Research Committee drafted a motion, concerning OURs, and seconded by the FC, that was sent to the UCC in January. Feedback from the UCC suggested that the UC was tabling the motion rather than sending it to the Research UPC implying that organizational changes involving OURS were currently in progress. Reportedly, the UCC has stated that the New Grant Award statement issued by OURS is intended only as a guideline but does not have official standing. This prompted several faculty members to recommend that the current OURS statement be removed from the web.

Regarding principle investigator management of grant accounting, which is now required by OURS' New Grant Award statement, Dr. Fung mentioned that currently faculty lacked adequate information regarding how much of their grant was already spent. Mr. William Laird, CFO, indicated to Dr. Castro that he would be pleased to attend a FC meeting either in April or May, regarding ongoing administrative changes that effect research grant administration and accounting, and to discuss the restructuring of the research.

Dr. Castro mentioned that he was unaware of any existing mechanism for the UCC to report back on the dispositions of recommendations sent to them. Dr. Shoenberger stated that an online tracking system was being developed.

Faculty Status - Dr. Allen Shoenberger, Chair

Dr. Shoenberger, Law, distributed a Faculty Status Committee report dated March 9. Regarding the market-equity adjustment for faculty salaries, Dr. Shoenberger suggested that there were two major issues: i) whether the amount of funding was adequate and ii) the process by which the funds would be allocated among schools and departments. The Faculty Status Committee felt that the process should be made more transparent so as to ensure the faculty of the fairness of the process. Council members engaged in extensive discussion of these two issues.

In terms of the amount of funding, the Faculty Status Committee believes that the estimated $4 million is inadequate because it pays insufficient attention to the fact that the cost of living in Chicago is considerably higher than the benchmark schools to which Loyola is being compared. The Committee also is concerned that the allocation of the funds among schools and departments may be flawed due to faulty and inadequate data. Dr. David Schweikart, Philosophy, suggested that the size of the funding was basically already determined and that what was urgent was the determination of how the funds would be allocated.

3

The Faculty Status Committee has estimated that the market-equity adjustment, on average, would result in $10,000 for Professors, $7900 for Associate Professors and $2900 for Assistant Professors. Librarians would also be included in the adjustment.

Reportedly, the allocation of funds will be based on faculty productivity during the last five years. Some stated that they would feel uncomfortable with having to tout their past accomplishments.

Dr. Richard Bowen, Psychology, suggested that given the complexity of the allocation procedure, the process should be slowed down. Others suggested that if the process were not made more transparent, the allocation of funds would undermine faculty morale.

Motion:

Moved: Seconded: Action:

It is vital that the Salary Equity Adjustment program be as transparent to faculty as possible in order to forestall negative reactions. Dr. Allen Shoenberger Dr. Nicholas Lash The motion carried with: 9 in agreement, 2 opposed and 4 abstentions.

The complete motion is attached.

Election - Dr. Judith Wittner, Chair

The nomination process for FC members is proceeding. Council members recognized how very timeconsuming the process was and so expressed their appreciation to Dr. Wittner for her significant efforts on a very important task.

Education - Dr. Robert Birely, S.J., Chair

Dr. Birely, History, reported that the core renewal program for undergraduate students at all schools was proceeding. There has been one open hearing and another is scheduled for March 25th. Currently, there is a proposal to reduce the core curriculum from 20 courses to 12. A principal objection to this proposal is that no literature courses are required. A suggestion has been made to compromise on a 16 course core. It was also suggested that the individual schools could also add on their own basic requirements.

Awards - Dr. Richard Bowen, Chair

Currently there are half a dozen nominees for the Faculty of the Year Award.

V. New Business

May Meeting Date: It was decided that the date of the final FC meeting of the academic year, would not be changed, but instead would remain as May 5th.

Academic Freedom Resolution: 4

Dr. Wittner cited a New York Times article by Adam Liptak, dated February 28, 2004, that pointed out that publishers could face legal consequences for editing manuscripts from authors in disfavored nations on the ground that such actions amount to trading with the enemy. She recommended that the FC send a letter to John Snow, Secretary of the Treasury, protesting such a policy as an attack on academic freedom. See attached.

Motion:

Moved: Seconded: Action:

to send a letter to Mr. John Snow, Secretary of the United States Treasury Department objecting strongly to the Treasury Department's move towards censorship threatens the rights of citizens under the First Amendment Dr. Judith Wittner Dr. Bren Murphy The motion passed unanimously.

The complete motion is attached.

SSOM Faculty Senate Representative - Dr. Edward J. Neafsey: Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Anatomy, reported on the Medical School's Faculty Senate Elections to the Senate have been pending for one-and-a-half years. It was further reported that the administration is studying early retirement programs. Because of conflicting reports, it is unclear whether the early retirement program for Lakeside faculty also applies to medical faculty.

It was also announced that the stipend for graduate assistants has been increased by $2 thousand.

VII. Adjournment

Motion: Moved: Seconded: Action:

that the meeting be adjourned Dr. Prudence Moylan Dr. Nicholas Lash The motion passed unanimously and the meeting was adjourned at 5:12 PM.

Respectfully reported,

Nicholas A. Lash, Secretary to the Faculty Council

Members Present

Arts and Sciences: Dr. Robert Birely (History), Dr. Richard Bowen (Psychology), Dr. Anthony Cardoza (History), Dr. Leslie Fung (Chemistry), Dr. Gerry McDonald (Math/ Computer Science), Dr. Prudence Moylan (History), Dr. Bren Murphy (Communications), Dr. David Schweickart (Philosophy), Dr. Judith Wittner (Sociology)

5

Professional Schools: Dr. Harvey Boller (Business), Dr. Kim Dell'Angella (Pediatrics), Dr. Anthony Castro (CBN and Anatomy), Dr. Thomas DeStefani (Pediatrics), Dr. Karen Egenes (Nursing), Dr. Nicholas Lash (Business), Dr. Allen Shoenberger (Law), Dr. Barbara Velsor-Fredrich (Nursing). Graduate Institutes and Professional Librarians: Ms. Lenora Berendt (Libraries), Ms. Kerry Cochrane (Libraries). Guests: Mr. Michael Napora (Library), Dr. E.J. Neafsey (Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Anatomy).

6

Attachment #1 From Allen Shoenberger

To:

Faculty Council Members

Date:

3/11/04 1:40PM

Subject:

Re: Salary Equity motion

Here is the text of the final resolution.

Faculty Council Salary Equity Resolution Adopted March 10, 2004

It is vital that the Salary Equity Adjustment program be as transparent to faculty as possible in order to forestall negative reactions.

As currently formulated, it raises serious concerns.

COMPARISON GROUP While it has been widely represented that the objective is to bring Loyola up to 60%, the

question remains "60% of what"? "What" must have something to do with the defined group of comparable schools, but exactly "what schools" and "what salary data" should be something that faculty can easily and independently check.

Selection of that comparable group of schools may be fair when certain comparisons are made, comparisons of teaching load, for example; but any particular group of universities may be unfair and inappropriate for comparative salary purposes.

COST OF LIVING The University has identified two categories of universities, so called "heavyweight" and

"middleweight" universities. Unfortunately, Loyola is located in a higher cost city than most of those schools. Indeed, the mean cost of living for both sets of schools is well below a 40% level by comparison with Chicago. Are we trying to achieve 60% of something based on absolute dollars or based on what those dollars can buy? Is Chicago's cost of living being taken into consideration? We believe that "equity" implies the latter.

TIME IN RANK Moreover, the use of such schools at a disaggregate level (i.e., attempting to compare salary

data between Dept. X at Loyola and departments at other schools) introduces additional problems. Failure to account for time in rank, for example, distorts salary comparisons.

QUALITY OF DEPARTMENT OR SCHOOLS Furthermore, a Loyola department or school may already be ranked highly, say in the top five in

the country, but the entire department may be below the 60 % salary target for such departments. Within that department there will be below average faculty members. To provide a below average equity adjustment to faculty members in such departments may be quite unfair. Such "below average" faculty members may be far more valuable than "above average" faculty members in other departments at Loyola or in similar departments at the comparable schools.

In short, using a given set of schools for comparative purposes at the department or school level may be inequitable.

7

SALARY COMPRESSION Last, the data by rank for Loyola that are reported to AAUP suggest serious salary compression

exists at Loyola. While new faculty have been hired at or near the market for their departments or schools, faculty at the associate and full professor levels have fallen far behind the market. Equity adjustments must be skewed toward those who absorbed the greatest costs in the attempt to balance Loyola's budget through years of restrictions on faculty salaries. CLARIFICATION NEEDED

Clarification is urgently needed to make this process more transparent so that faculty will know they are being treated fairly.

8

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download